Effects of the preparer's justification on the reviewer's hypothesis generation and judment in analytical procedures

Accounting, Organizations and Society

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 203-215

  Yip Ow, Jackson ^a   Tan, Hun Tong ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034134918     PISSN: 03613682     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0361-3682(99)00026-4     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson, C. A., New, B. L., & Speer, J. R. (1985). Argument availability as a mediator of social theory perseverance. Social Cognition, 3, 235-249.
2. Anderson, C. A., & Godfrey, S. (1987). Thoughts about actions: The effects of specificity and availability of imagined behavioral scripts on expectations about oneself and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 293-305.
3. Anderson, J. C., Kaplan, S. E., & Reckers, P. J. (1992). The effects of output interference on analytical procedures judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 11(2), 1-13.
4. Arens, A. A., & Loebbecke, J. K. (1997). Auditing: An Integrated Approach (7th Ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.
5. Asare, S. K., & McDaniel, L. S. (1996). The effects of familiarity with the preparer and task complexity on the effectiveness of the audit review process. The Accounting Review, 71(1), 139-159.
6. Cohen, J. (1960). A Coefficient of Agreement for National Scales, Educational and Psychological Measurement, XX(1), 37-46.
7. Elstein, A. S., Shulman, L. S., & Sprafka, S. A. (1978). Medical Decision Making: An Analysis of Clinical Reasoning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1-31.
9. Gettys, C. F., & Fisher, S. D. (1979). Hypothesis plausibility and hypothesis generation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 93-110.
10. Gibbins, M. (1984). Propositions about the psychology of professional judgment in public accounting. Journal of Accounting Research, 22, 103-125.
11. Heiman, V. B. (1990). Auditors' assessments of the likelihood of analytical review explanations. The Accounting Review, 65(4), 875-890.
12. Hirst, D. E. (1994). Auditors' sensitivity to source reliability. Journal of Accounting Research, 32, 113-126.
13. Hirt, E. R., & Markman, D. (1995). Multiple explanation: A consider-an-alternative strategy for debiasing judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1069-1086.
14. Kennedy, J., & Peecher, M. E. (1997). Judging auditors' technical knowledge. Journal of Accounting Research, 35(2), 279- 293.
15. Koehler, D. J. (1991). Explanation, imagination, and confidence in judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 499-519.
16. Koonce, L. (1992). Explanation and counterexplanation during audit analytical review. The Accounting Review, 67(1), 59-76.
17. Libby, R., & Trotman, K. (1993). The review process as a control of differential recall of evidence in auditor judgments. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18(6), 559-574.
18. Nickerson, R. S. (1984). Retrieval inhibition from part-set cueing: A persisting enigma in memory cognition. Memory & Cognition, 12, 531-552.
19. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell, & Co. (1976). Research Opportunities in Auditing. New York: Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.
20. Peecher, M. E. (1996). The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 34(1), 125- 140.
21. Prawitt, D. F. (1995). Staffing assignments for judgment-oriented audit tasks, the effects of structured audit technology and environment. The Accounting Review, 70(3), 443- 465.
22. Ricchiute, D. N. (1997). Effects of judgment on memory: Experiments in recognition bias and process dissociation in a professional judgment task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70(1), 27-39.
23. Rich, J. R., Solomon, I., & Trotman, K. (1997). The audit review process: A cognitive characterization from the persuasion perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22(5), 481-505.
24. Rich, J. R., Solomon, I., & Trotman, K. (1997b). Multi-auditor judgment/decision making research: A decade later. Journal of Accounting Literature, 16, 481-505.
25. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1989). Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96(1), 58-83.
26. Sullivan, J. D., Gnospelius, R. A., Defliese, R. L., & Janicke, H. R. (1985). Montgomery's Auditing (10th Ed.). John Wiliey & Sons).
27. Tan, H. T. (1995). Effects of expectations, prior involvement, and review awareness on memory for audit evidence and judgment. Journal of Accounting Research, 33, 113-135.
28. Tan, H. T., & Libby, R. (1997). Tacit managerial versus technical knowledge as determinants of auditor performance in the field. Journal of Accounting Research, 35, 97-113.
29. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.